Do we need a more sophisticated theory of reincarnation?

It is sometimes claimed that some Stevensonian Cases of the Reincarnation Type as studied by dr. Jim Tucker and others may indeed be paranormal (i.e. inexplicable by normal means) but that they certainly need to be explained by a hypothesis that would be more 'sophisticated' than straightforward reincarnation in the sense of the rebirth of a personal soul into a new physical body.
Some scholars are explicitly motivated by philosophical or theological considerations which keep them from accepting 'real' reincarnation. For instance, most Christians and Swedenborgians seem to believe that reincarnation simply does not exist, so that if they do not just want to discount all data of paranormal CORTs they are compelled to explain these data by a more complex non-reincarnative hypothesis. In my view, this is reminiscent of conservative Christian scholars who tried to explain away paleontological findings that suggest evolution by claiming that they were especially created by God to test our faith.
Other scholars simply do not believe in survival after death, because they are convinced that neuropsychological data would rule this out. The mind would depend on the brain to such an extent that it is inconceivable that it would survive brain death. I think these scholars simply are not open to data that could falsify their general theory, such as cases of Near-Death Experience during a flat EEG.
A third group of scholars hold that survival is possible, but they find reincarnation too unappealing or bizarre and therefore 'unacceptable'. They sometimes point to phenomena that superficially resemble CORTs such as claims about children that would be incarnations of a Hindu divinity. If we take a closer look we find that the similarities are very weak, both in terms of statements of the child and in terms of the social context.

As I explain in my lecture Past-Life Interpretations: We Need All of Them, I think there is good, specific evidence for 'real' reincarnation and that it is the simplest interpretation that covers all the facts. For instance, only reincarnation can really explain the children's strong identification with the previous life.

Thus far we do not need a more complex hypothesis, not even if that may seem more 'sophisticated' (and therefore more attractive) to some.

Titus Rivas

Also see: Rebirth and Personal identity: Is Reincarnation an Intrinsically Impersonal Concept?